Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phil Hartnoll

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was merge and redirect. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 00:30, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Phil Hartnoll

Member of notable band. But warranting own article, while article is as sketchy as this? Suggest a merge with Orbital (band) --Oscarthecat 12:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

• Merge per nom. KillerChihuahua^?!? 12:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep has some solo remixing and DJ work that should be covered seperately from the Orbital article. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Starblind. --Terence Ong 13:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Orbital is an important electronic music band but no one knows who the members are because the nature of the genre tends to make the artists anonymous, so it doesn't justify a separate article for each member. Ruby 14:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • That's just not true of Orbital. They've played a lot of gigs around the world, and are famously known as the Hartnoll brothers. --kingboyk 23:37, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep. I'd heard (faintly) of him, but not of Orbital, and he has solo work as Starblind says. Article needs to have more to it though. Robin Johnson 14:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per nom. zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to the Orbital article. Individual details are not necessarily notable, either way. -Rebelguys2 19:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per above. --NaconKantari e|t||c|m 20:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per nomination AvB ÷ talk 23:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Question: Could I be bold and just redirect it to Orbital? (And move the AFD notice to the Talk page. Allowed?) If someone comes up with information worthy of an article later on they can just undo the redirect. The Hartnoll brothers are notable, but the article as it stands is pointless. --kingboyk 23:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Done for both brothers. I vote to Keep the redirect pages. --kingboyk 23:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.